↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Web-based interventions for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease: systematic review and future directions

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
Title
Web-based interventions for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease: systematic review and future directions
Published in
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, May 2015
DOI 10.2147/ceg.s56069
Pubmed ID
Authors

Colleen Stiles-Shields, Laurie Keefer

Abstract

Behavioral intervention technologies (BITs), the application of psychological and behavioral interventions through the use of technology, provide the opportunity for clinicians to deliver care through a means that overcomes a number of treatment barriers. Web-based interventions are a subset of BITs developing as promising alternatives to face-to-face delivery of treatments and monitoring for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). A systematic review of literature resulted in five empirical studies of web-based interventions for UC and CD. Additionally, an informal search of a popular search engine yielded limited, currently available, web-based interventions for patients with UC and CD. Despite being an ideal population for the development and dissemination of online interventions, patients with UC and CD have far less treatment options compared to other behavioral health concerns. However, given the growing body of research involving web-based interventions for other conditions, researchers and clinicians targeting UC and CD management and treatment have the benefit of being able to utilize the BIT model, an existing conceptual framework for the development of web-based interventions for both conditions. The BIT model is presented and applied to the treatment of UC and CD, as well as a technology development program, Purple, and usability guidelines to guide clinical researchers in the future development, evaluation, and dissemination of BITs for patients with UC and CD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 65 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 17%
Psychology 7 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 12 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2015.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#135
of 331 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,370
of 278,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 331 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,918 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.